If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Our maintenance of bases and troops overseas, although perhaps related to the "nation building" question is actually at least to some degree a different issue. There are certainly multiple reasons for this practice. Some of it is to protect our economic interests, some to protect out allies, and some to simply keep perceived enemies at bay.

correct! but a good branch off for talking about.

"So what is big is not always the Trout nor the Deer but the chance, the being there. And what is full is not necessarily the creel nor the freezer, but the memory." ~ Aldo Leopold

"The Greatest Obstacle to Discovery is not Ignorance -- It is the Illusion of Knowledge" ~ Daniel Boorstin

Boy I hate it when my memory slips. I forgot about US Foods role in central America and Cuba. Big business and big money played a huge role in establlishing US friendly dictators in that region.

and built roads and rail and shipping ports for sugar and was it Dole? the pineapple canner as well. but wasn't that a lot of private industry dollars combining with U.S. military "protection"? but it that / those cases were we nation building? Teaching how to form a government. Or simply exploiting? and the infrastructure we added did help build the nations in question but were made for our own selfish reasons????

"So what is big is not always the Trout nor the Deer but the chance, the being there. And what is full is not necessarily the creel nor the freezer, but the memory." ~ Aldo Leopold

"The Greatest Obstacle to Discovery is not Ignorance -- It is the Illusion of Knowledge" ~ Daniel Boorstin

and built roads and rail and shipping ports for sugar and was it Dole? the pineapple canner as well. but wasn't that a lot of private industry dollars combining with U.S. military "protection"? but it that / those cases were we nation building? Teaching how to form a government. Or simply exploiting? and the infrastructure we added did help build the nations in question but were made for our own selfish reasons????

Good questions Ken.

When American Fruit and others beagn in Central America, I don't think anything they did was for any other reason than to get there product grown and to market as quickly and cheaply as posible. The SOP of the time was payoff's to whoever was in power, and over time, many of those companies, with US backing, helped to establish business friendly " leaders" and keep them in power. ( Batista as an example ) So in the beginning, I feel it was all about the profit and building the companies.

As we, the world, became more inter- connected, and it became frowned upon to support despotic leaders, then I believe we began "Nation Building" in earnest. ( Peron and Penochete come to mind, but they were more early 60's ) and we began to accept the " lesser of two evils " approach to leaders we supported. And I think that pattern continues today. While we thump our chests and demand democracy from so many other countries, it is pretty clear that we are just as happy to work with a head of state who is pro US ( the Saudis come to mind )

Bottom line: it was and is about the $$$....., and began in earnest, by the US, after the Spanish American War, when all of the then super powers were in decline world wide.

PS:
As a nation builder we stink and have done a piss poor job overall. England on the other hand had great success, but it was done by occupying, dismantiling the existing rule structure and spending years in the countries as both a military and or business presence. ( East India Company comes to mind ) Countries like Jamaica, India, Caymen Island are all built on the English model and run pretty well.

When American Fruit and others beagn in Central America, I don't think anything they did was for any other reason than to get there product grown and to market as quickly and cheaply as posible. The SOP of the time was payoff's to whoever was in power, and over time, many of those companies, with US backing, helped to establish business friendly " leaders" and keep them in power. ( Batista as an example ) So in the beginning, I feel it was all about the profit and building the companies.

As we, the world, became more inter- connected, and it became frowned upon to support despotic leaders, then I believe we began "Nation Building" in earnest. ( Peron and Penochete come to mind, but they were more early 60's ) and we began to accept the " lesser of two evils " approach to leaders we supported. And I think that pattern continues today. While we thump our chests and demand democracy from so many other countries, it is pretty clear that we are just as happy to work with a head of state who is pro US ( the Saudis come to mind )

Bottom line: it was and is about the $$$....., and began in earnest, by the US, after the Spanish American War, when all of the then super powers were in decline world wide.

PS:As a nation builder we stink and have done a piss poor job overall. England on the other hand had great success, but it was done by occupying, dismantiling the existing rule structure and spending years in the countries as both a military and or business presence. ( East India Company comes to mind ) Countries like Jamaica, India, Caymen Island are all built on the English model and run pretty well.

Don't forget the term "Banana Republic" (not the clothing maker) and the role United Fruit had in forming the US' "colonial" (for lack of a better term) efforts. Nation building, like general exploration, is clearly often about expanding markets (which is NOT a bad thing). As Ken mentioned, in the past, at least, much of the infrastructure has been financed by the business interests that have operations in these countries. We also know that there have been times when these same financial interests have involved a bit of intrigue and have gotten the US involved in military actions.

Any doctrine that weakens personal responsibility for judgment and for action helps create the attitudes that welcome and support the totalitarian state.
(John Dewey)

Associate yourself with men of good quality if you esteem your own reputation; for 'tis better to be alone than in bad company.
(George Washington)

and built roads and rail and shipping ports for sugar and was it Dole? the pineapple canner as well. but wasn't that a lot of private industry dollars combining with U.S. military "protection"? but it that / those cases were we nation building? Teaching how to form a government. Or simply exploiting? and the infrastructure we added did help build the nations in question but were made for our own selfish reasons????

Originally Posted by Golddogs

Good questions Ken.

When American Fruit and others beagn in Central America, I don't think anything they did was for any other reason than to get there product grown and to market as quickly and cheaply as posible. The SOP of the time was payoff's to whoever was in power, and over time, many of those companies, with US backing, helped to establish business friendly " leaders" and keep them in power. ( Batista as an example ) So in the beginning, I feel it was all about the profit and building the companies.

As we, the world, became more inter- connected, and it became frowned upon to support despotic leaders, then I believe we began "Nation Building" in earnest. ( Peron and Penochete come to mind, but they were more early 60's ) and we began to accept the " lesser of two evils " approach to leaders we supported. And I think that pattern continues today. While we thump our chests and demand democracy from so many other countries, it is pretty clear that we are just as happy to work with a head of state who is pro US ( the Saudis come to mind )

Bottom line: it was and is about the $$$....., and began in earnest, by the US, after the Spanish American War, when all of the then super powers were in decline world wide.

PS:
As a nation builder we stink and have done a piss poor job overall. England on the other hand had great success, but it was done by occupying, dismantiling the existing rule structure and spending years in the countries as both a military and or business presence. ( East India Company comes to mind ) Countries like Jamaica, India, Caymen Island are all built on the English model and run pretty well.

Lets not forget or reinterpret what United Fruit meant to Latin America. Not only did their operations rape the jungles of our southern neighbor, they also shut down all of the banana exports of the Caribbean countries of Grenada, St. Lucia and several others that had depended on the commerce for survival. (not to mention the fruit is way better) This was a blatant example of "Nation Building" being the pretty label given to the act of using our military and political influence to further the fortunes of corporations bent on exploitation.
The following by Pablo Neruda: (I can not find the name of this translator.)

"When the trumpet sounded
everything was prepared on earth,
and Jehovah gave the world
to Coca-Cola Inc., Anaconda,
Ford Motors, and other corporations.
The United Fruit Company
reserved for itself the most juicy
piece, the central coast of my world,
the delicate waist of America.

It rebaptized these countries
Banana Republics,
and over the sleeping dead,
over the unquiet heroes
who won greatness,
liberty, and banners,
it established an opera buffa:
it abolished free will,
gave out imperial crowns,
encouraged envy, attracted
the dictatorship of flies:
Trujillo flies, Tachos flies
Carias flies, Martinez flies,
Ubico flies, flies sticky with
submissive blood and marmalade,
drunken flies that buzz over
the tombs of the people,
circus flies, wise flies
expert at tyranny.

With the bloodthirsty flies
came the Fruit Company,
amassed coffee and fruit
in ships which put to sea like
overloaded trays with the treasures
from our sunken lands.

Meanwhile the Indians fall
into the sugared depths of the
harbors and are buried in the
morning mists;
a corpse rolls, a thing without
name, a discarded number,
a bunch of rotten fruit
thrown on the garbage heap

Im old enough to remember when that post would have been pure comedy. Sadly there is a whole lot of truth to it today. Our nation building efforts definitely need to be focused right here at home until we can get our own house in order we need to stay out of other peoples business

they also shut down all of the banana exports of the Caribbean countries of Grenada, St. Lucia and several others that had depended on the commerce for survival. (not to mention the fruit is way better)

Totally agree. We have a good friend in Jamaica, Donald Thorpe, who started out in Bananas on his family farm, ( 40 acres ) and made enough to start his own Tour service. His first car was an old Renault and now has 2 Toyota mini vans and 3 Coaster busses.

Most of the export agriculture on that island was impacted by big business in the Latin American countries and was a major cause of many leaving to Canada and the UK for jobs. About the only real ag exports left are Rum and Red Stripe, Blue Mountain coffee and some sugar.

( ironically Fruit of the Loom has a very nice factory just outside of Mo Bay supplying underwear instead of Bananas )

Totally agree. We have a good friend in Jamaica, Donald Thorpe, who started out in Bananas on his family farm, ( 40 acres ) and made enough to start his own Tour service. His first car was an old Renault and now has 2 Toyota mini vans and 3 Coaster busses.

Most of the export agriculture on that island was impacted by big business in the Latin American countries and was a major cause of many leaving to Canada and the UK for jobs. About the only real ag exports left are Rum and Red Stripe, Blue Mountain coffee and some sugar.

( ironically Fruit of the Loom has a very nice factory just outside of Mo Bay supplying underwear instead of Bananas )

Oh no Golddogs, you just had to leave that out there didn't you? Fruit of the loom is making "Banana Slings" now????? (thongs for guys) Could not help myself. But back to topic, sort of. In 1992 we took a great tour of Grenada(a local guide) that included the banana farms and the spice warehouses. We were given a "hand" of bananas at each place so we could compare. I swear it was like a vineyard tour. Each farmer's product had its own taste, texture and level of sweetness. It was the best tasting fruit I have ever had. When I asked the driver why we could not buy this guys produce back in the states, he gave me the long sad tale about UFCO and how the windward islands were kept out of the US markets. Sad for them, sad for us.

Im old enough to remember when that post would have been pure comedy. Sadly there is a whole lot of truth to it today. Our nation building efforts definitely need to be focused right here at home until we can get our own house in order we need to stay out of other peoples business

All of my posts are "astute."
If you could transcend your bias you would know that.